Disappointed aircraft changed from lie flat bed to angle seat!
#61
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 7,708
Instead, I moved my cash business to SQ. Pay similar amounts, but get guaranteed product. You can also guarantee F on SQ on 3 flights a day.
Another poster above has a fair point. CX apparently is far better than SQ about ensuring a long haul product on flights over a certain length. I remember years ago when CX was still sometimes flying regional frames to the ME and even Australia once in a while (!!), but those days are long gone. On CX you fly to the ME, India, CMB, MLE, and Australia and you are guaranteed longhaul. And apparently SQ doesnt. So at least I should give credit where due. But just saying with SIN flights, a) yes people pay those rates, and b) CX has definitely lost some cash from me because of the lack of equipment predictability.
Frankly, if I didn't have the SQ options maybe I'd stay with CX. But CX's major competitor offers better bang for buck IMO since they guarantee the product so I give my business to them. That's called competition!
#62
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: MNL / SFO / NYC
Programs: IHG Spire | Marriott Plat | UA Plat | AA Plat Pro
Posts: 533
SQ’s regional J was never their old long-haul product. It’s always been a 2-2-2 angled flat product on the 772/773/333 which are still very much in service today.
#63
Join Date: Jun 2006
Programs: AA EP 4MM, UA 1MM, DL 1MM
Posts: 407
I used to pay those rates on CX but stopped. My last CX few round trips to Singapore have been Asia Miles J redemptions. The reason I stopped paying cash to SIN on CX is 100pct because of this thread (regional equipment unpredictability).
Instead, I moved my cash business to SQ. Pay similar amounts, but get guaranteed product. You can also guarantee F on SQ on 3 flights a day.
Another poster above has a fair point. CX apparently is far better than SQ about ensuring a long haul product on flights over a certain length. I remember years ago when CX was still sometimes flying regional frames to the ME and even Australia once in a while (!!), but those days are long gone. On CX you fly to the ME, India, CMB, MLE, and Australia and you are guaranteed longhaul. And apparently SQ doesnt. So at least I should give credit where due. But just saying with SIN flights, a) yes people pay those rates, and b) CX has definitely lost some cash from me because of the lack of equipment predictability.
Frankly, if I didn't have the SQ options maybe I'd stay with CX. But CX's major competitor offers better bang for buck IMO since they guarantee the product so I give my business to them. That's called competition!
Instead, I moved my cash business to SQ. Pay similar amounts, but get guaranteed product. You can also guarantee F on SQ on 3 flights a day.
Another poster above has a fair point. CX apparently is far better than SQ about ensuring a long haul product on flights over a certain length. I remember years ago when CX was still sometimes flying regional frames to the ME and even Australia once in a while (!!), but those days are long gone. On CX you fly to the ME, India, CMB, MLE, and Australia and you are guaranteed longhaul. And apparently SQ doesnt. So at least I should give credit where due. But just saying with SIN flights, a) yes people pay those rates, and b) CX has definitely lost some cash from me because of the lack of equipment predictability.
Frankly, if I didn't have the SQ options maybe I'd stay with CX. But CX's major competitor offers better bang for buck IMO since they guarantee the product so I give my business to them. That's called competition!
#64
Join Date: May 2007
Programs: UA 1K, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 5,456
I'm on CX 602 in July from MLE-HKG (my first flight on CX). How likely am I to have a lie flat seat on this flight. It seems by this thread that since it is long haul, I am pretty likely to have it but I wondered how often they might swap out aircraft on this route to an angled seat.? It is currently scheduled as an A333. Thanks in advance for any replies
#65
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 7,708
I'm on CX 602 in July from MLE-HKG (my first flight on CX). How likely am I to have a lie flat seat on this flight. It seems by this thread that since it is long haul, I am pretty likely to have it but I wondered how often they might swap out aircraft on this route to an angled seat.? It is currently scheduled as an A333. Thanks in advance for any replies
Since the route launched, I can only think of one or two times a swap happened. It was on a very specific, highly unlikely situation where the plane broke down, pax were stranded in Male for a day, and CX needed to ship two flight's worth of passengers at once. They sent a regional 777 for the trip because it holds nearly 400 passengers. Aka, this is essentially a "no swap" route.
Refer to our fleet guide for details. You'll notice MLE is in the medium/lonfhaul (no swap) matrix.
Cathay Pacific / Cathay Dragon Fleet, Route and Configuration Guide
#69
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 7,708
This is true.
But as sxc mentions, and I point out above, SQ's regional product is much better than CX's. Both hard and soft. And on short-haul regional flights, I can predict what I'm going to fly on SQ. With CX I can't. (You can book SQ long-haul products to HKG, PVG and PEK, the three regional routes I use SQ for the most, like clockwork).
So there's arguing and then there's reality. The reality is I spend my money based on the way I call it on here, and many others do too: CX loses a good amount of my short-haul / regional business as a result of what I describe, and I'm not the only one. CX's crap yields in recent years aren't an accident. CX doesn't have quite the corporate captive expat market they used to, where all these former British-run companies would sign-up with Swire just because. Times have changed. This dynamic definitely affects their yield, and likewise their bottom line.
It's a frequent "break the ice" meeting conversation piece to start a meeting maybe chatting about the airline you flew over, and plenty of my peers and folks I interact with have the same feelings I do about CX lately. Soft product is terrible and regional business class is very uncomfortable. This isn't groundbreaking! And most of these people dictate where they spend theirs or their company's cash. SQ is my preferred carrier to SIN for these very reasons I mention, despite my overall loyalty to CX. Their J class rack rates are similar to CX fwiw. Plus, you can guarantee F / Suites when you want it. Predictability in product matters, and CX's regional biz is behind both SQ's long-haul and regional product. Aka, if I choose CX I can end up on the worst product between the two. The only area where SQ is worse relates to WiFi; the rates are generally extortionary and speeds slow. CX A350 is far better.
It's definitely kudos to CX for straightening out their medium haul++ flights. In years past CX also did the swap-a-regional-aircraft game to the Middle East and even Australia, and my that was bad. But they fixed that 5+ years ago and they deserve credit for sorting it out.
Yup.
But as sxc mentions, and I point out above, SQ's regional product is much better than CX's. Both hard and soft. And on short-haul regional flights, I can predict what I'm going to fly on SQ. With CX I can't. (You can book SQ long-haul products to HKG, PVG and PEK, the three regional routes I use SQ for the most, like clockwork).
So there's arguing and then there's reality. The reality is I spend my money based on the way I call it on here, and many others do too: CX loses a good amount of my short-haul / regional business as a result of what I describe, and I'm not the only one. CX's crap yields in recent years aren't an accident. CX doesn't have quite the corporate captive expat market they used to, where all these former British-run companies would sign-up with Swire just because. Times have changed. This dynamic definitely affects their yield, and likewise their bottom line.
It's a frequent "break the ice" meeting conversation piece to start a meeting maybe chatting about the airline you flew over, and plenty of my peers and folks I interact with have the same feelings I do about CX lately. Soft product is terrible and regional business class is very uncomfortable. This isn't groundbreaking! And most of these people dictate where they spend theirs or their company's cash. SQ is my preferred carrier to SIN for these very reasons I mention, despite my overall loyalty to CX. Their J class rack rates are similar to CX fwiw. Plus, you can guarantee F / Suites when you want it. Predictability in product matters, and CX's regional biz is behind both SQ's long-haul and regional product. Aka, if I choose CX I can end up on the worst product between the two. The only area where SQ is worse relates to WiFi; the rates are generally extortionary and speeds slow. CX A350 is far better.
It's definitely kudos to CX for straightening out their medium haul++ flights. In years past CX also did the swap-a-regional-aircraft game to the Middle East and even Australia, and my that was bad. But they fixed that 5+ years ago and they deserve credit for sorting it out.
Yup.
#70
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: HKG
Programs: BA(GGL) QF LTS CX AM, Hilton Diamond, PPL(A)
Posts: 1,654
#71
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: HKG
Programs: BA(GGL) QF LTS CX AM, Hilton Diamond, PPL(A)
Posts: 1,654
This is true.
But as sxc mentions, and I point out above, SQ's regional product is much better than CX's. Both hard and soft. And on short-haul regional flights, I can predict what I'm going to fly on SQ. With CX I can't. (You can book SQ long-haul products to HKG, PVG and PEK, the three regional routes I use SQ for the most, like clockwork).
So there's arguing and then there's reality. The reality is I spend my money based on the way I call it on here, and many others do too: CX loses a good amount of my short-haul / regional business as a result of what I describe, and I'm not the only one. CX's crap yields in recent years aren't an accident. CX doesn't have quite the corporate captive expat market they used to, where all these former British-run companies would sign-up with Swire just because. Times have changed. This dynamic definitely affects their yield, and likewise their bottom line.
It's a frequent "break the ice" meeting conversation piece to start a meeting maybe chatting about the airline you flew over, and plenty of my peers and folks I interact with have the same feelings I do about CX lately. Soft product is terrible and regional business class is very uncomfortable. This isn't groundbreaking! And most of these people dictate where they spend theirs or their company's cash. SQ is my preferred carrier to SIN for these very reasons I mention, despite my overall loyalty to CX. Their J class rack rates are similar to CX fwiw. Plus, you can guarantee F / Suites when you want it. Predictability in product matters, and CX's regional biz is behind both SQ's long-haul and regional product. Aka, if I choose CX I can end up on the worst product between the two. The only area where SQ is worse relates to WiFi; the rates are generally extortionary and speeds slow. CX A350 is far better.
It's definitely kudos to CX for straightening out their medium haul++ flights. In years past CX also did the swap-a-regional-aircraft game to the Middle East and even Australia, and my that was bad. But they fixed that 5+ years ago and they deserve credit for sorting it out.
Yup.
But as sxc mentions, and I point out above, SQ's regional product is much better than CX's. Both hard and soft. And on short-haul regional flights, I can predict what I'm going to fly on SQ. With CX I can't. (You can book SQ long-haul products to HKG, PVG and PEK, the three regional routes I use SQ for the most, like clockwork).
So there's arguing and then there's reality. The reality is I spend my money based on the way I call it on here, and many others do too: CX loses a good amount of my short-haul / regional business as a result of what I describe, and I'm not the only one. CX's crap yields in recent years aren't an accident. CX doesn't have quite the corporate captive expat market they used to, where all these former British-run companies would sign-up with Swire just because. Times have changed. This dynamic definitely affects their yield, and likewise their bottom line.
It's a frequent "break the ice" meeting conversation piece to start a meeting maybe chatting about the airline you flew over, and plenty of my peers and folks I interact with have the same feelings I do about CX lately. Soft product is terrible and regional business class is very uncomfortable. This isn't groundbreaking! And most of these people dictate where they spend theirs or their company's cash. SQ is my preferred carrier to SIN for these very reasons I mention, despite my overall loyalty to CX. Their J class rack rates are similar to CX fwiw. Plus, you can guarantee F / Suites when you want it. Predictability in product matters, and CX's regional biz is behind both SQ's long-haul and regional product. Aka, if I choose CX I can end up on the worst product between the two. The only area where SQ is worse relates to WiFi; the rates are generally extortionary and speeds slow. CX A350 is far better.
It's definitely kudos to CX for straightening out their medium haul++ flights. In years past CX also did the swap-a-regional-aircraft game to the Middle East and even Australia, and my that was bad. But they fixed that 5+ years ago and they deserve credit for sorting it out.
Yup.
but if you want to go north asia (esp mainland china) - who do you use?
#72
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 7,708
but if your point is CX still has me mostly stuck HK to China on CX or KA, you're definitely right. Not much I can do except for the odd MU flight ex-Shanghai, which I do for scheduling or inbound flight delay reasons.
But I've made meaningful dents in their share of my wallet by transferring most of my Singapore and about half my Japan business to the competition. (And not to mention I've moved a lot of my longhaul travel to competitors too, although that's not part of this thread). And when trips to China are back to back with other trips, I no longer have any reason to transit or visit HK. I just go straight. To put in perspective this year, that has happened 3 times so far. So its not peanuts - 3 less segments for me flying CX/KA to China than otherwise.
Essentially I'm less loyal than before and they have themselves to blame.
#74
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 7,708
#75
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 38
Does anyone know if HKG -> TPE has frequent equipment swaps? I specifically avoided the recliners and booked a nice afternoon flight on a 33K with LH config but reading this thread, I'm a bit scared on an equipment swap. Any info regarding this route would be helpful, thanks.